Sonu Pandit And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.65344 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -235 Year- 2018 Thana -UCHKAGAON District- GOPALGANJ ======================================================
1. Sonu Pandit, Son of Late Ghuran Pandit, Resident of Village- Mirganj Sabji Market, P.S.- Mirganj, District- Gopalganj.
2. Krishna Kumar, Son of Parma Singh, resident of Village- Balahata, P.S.- Uchkagaon, District- Gopalganj.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anusuiya Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-11-2018 Heard the parties.
The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Uchakagaon P.S.Case no.235 of 2018 registered for offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of Bihar Prohibtion Excise Act, 2016.
Allegation against the petitioner is about recovery of 190 and odd ltrs. of liquor from the vehicle of the petitioner and the petitioner no.2 separately.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the FIR itself shows that the petitioner nos.1 and 2 were driver of the vehicle, having no criminal antecedent and they have remained in custody for about two months.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.65344 of 2018 (2) dt.06-11-2018 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. also.
Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions JdugeII cumSpecial Judge, Gopalganj in connection with Uckhakagaon P.S.Case nO.235 of 2018.
With following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned court.
(ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and in the event of failure to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
With the aforesaid observation, this application is allowed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T